Taking serious view of the former Chief Minister of Maharashtra, Vilasrao Deshmukh (currently the Union Industries Minister), interfering in a criminal investigation against a family of a Congress MLA, the Supreme Court on Tuesday imposed an exemplary cost of Rs.10 lakh on the Maharashtra government.
A Bench comprising Justice G.S. Singhvi and Justice A.K. Ganguly, in separate but concurring judgments, held that Mr. Deshmukh, as the then Chief Minister and holding a position of great responsibility as a high constitutional functionary, had acted beyond all legal norms by giving directions to the District Collector to protect members of a particular family dealing in money-lending business from the normal process of law.
In his judgment, Justice Ganguly said: “This amounts to bestowing special favour to some chosen few at the cost of the vast number of poor people who as farmers have taken loans and who have come to the authorities of law and order to register their complaints against torture and atrocities by the money lenders. The instructions of the Chief Minister will certainly impede their access to legal redress and bring about a failure of the due process.”
Justice Ganguly pointed out that it was clear from the communication of the Collector, which contained the Chief Minister's instructions, that Mr. Deshmukh was aware of the complaints being filed against the said family. “Even then he [Mr. Deshmukh] passed an order for a special treatment in favour of the said family, which is unknown to law.”
The Bench was dismissing an appeal filed by Maharashtra against a judgment of the Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court imposing Rs.25,000 costs on a petition by a group of farmers alleging that the police refused to register a criminal case against Congress legislator Dilipkumar Sananda's father Gokulchand Sananda, a private money-lender.
Justice Ganguly said Mr. Deshmukh wanted to give the members of the said family special protection which was not available to other similarly placed persons.
It is clear from the Collector's order dated June 5, 2006 — where the Chief Minister's instructions were quoted — that Mr. Deshmukh was acting solely on political consideration to screen the family of the MLA from the normal process of law.
Justice Ganguly said: “We cannot shut our eyes to the stark realities. It is clear that close to two lakh farmers committed suicide in India between 1997 and 2008. Even though Maharashtra is one of the richest States in the country, and in its capital Mumbai, 25,000 of India's $1 lakh millionaires reside, the Vidarbha region of Maharashtra is the worst place in the country for farmers.”
In his judgment, Justice Singhvi said: “The cases involving pervasive misuse of public office for private gains, which have come to light in last few decades, tend to shake the people's confidence, and one is constrained to think that India has freed itself from British colonialism only to come in the grip of a new class, which tries to rule on the same colonial principles.”
Justice Singhvi said: “The camouflage of sophistry used by Mr. Vilasrao Deshmukh in the instructions given by him and the affidavit filed by him before this court is clearly misleading. The message to the authorities was loud and clear, i.e., they were not to take the complaints against the Sananda family seriously and not to proceed against them.”
The Bench held that the instructions were ultra vires the provisions of the relevant Act and dismissed the appeal.
